User talk:Semsûrî: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Revision as of 13:16, 9 March 2024

Thank you for your efforts

		The Barnstar of Diligence
		Your scrutiny and care for Kurdish articles that regularly get vandalized is impressive and I thank you very much. I just wanted to say thanks. TataofTata (talk) 13:19, 22 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for your efforts

		The Current Events Barnstar
		Awarded for efforts in expanding and verifying articles related to the 2021–2022 Russo-Ukrainian crisis and 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine. Awarded by Cdjp1 (talk) 7 March 2022 (UTC)

Mass creation of stubs on Turkish villages

Hi,

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. You currently appear to be engaged in the mass creation of articles on Turkish villages. Such mass creation can be disruptive, and if you wish to continue creating large quantities of short, similar articles on this topic (or any topic) you should first see if there is a consensus to do so, or if the community would prefer this content be provided in a different manner.

Thank you, BilledMammal (talk) 02:23, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to add quickly he was initially engaged in redirecting Lugnuts village stubs (like myself as well) which found the opposition of Markussep. Following Semsuri began to adapt and also create similar articles as Lugnuts (in a better expanded fashion). But I can follow Billed Mammals concern and I'd also advise to request permission for future mass creation, which you can do here. Courtesy ping to @Markussep. Paradise Chronicle (talk) 08:23, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I received some backlash at first for redirecting village stubs but then went on a campaign to expand those stubs a bit and moreover create articles for villages and towns that lacked an article. There were articles for all of the villages in certain provinces, while no articles for the villages in other provinces. That doesn't make sense. Per WP:GEOLAND, my edits seem justified and my creations include articles for settlements like Altınbaşak, Üzümlü with 2K people and Gökçe, Artuklu with 10K. The community seem to prefer stubs over no article at all so I went with the flow and tried to make the stubs better than Lugnuts' by adding info on coordinates, population, attached hamlets if thats the case and so on. Semsûrî (talk) 11:56, 25 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

What is uncontroversial when done is small numbers often becomes controversial when done in large numbers, and in the past two months you have produced more articles than any editor did in all of 2022. Further, semi-automated mass creation, which includes your creations as I assume you are using a boilerplate text and not retyping the content each and every time you create an article, is required by policy to be approved at WP:BRFA.

For the moment, please stop mass creating articles and open a discussion at that forum about whether the community supports the mass creation of articles on this subject. BilledMammal (talk) 06:31, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The articles that I've created are not uniform. I do have a boilerplate text which gives me the foundation (templates, categories and the primary references that confirm its administrative division + population). However, how the article will become, depends on info I have from secondary references that is not part of my boilerplate. Therefore articles can vary from stubs like Ortayurt, Erzincan to start-class ones like Gelinkaya, Midyat or Derecik District.

In regard to a bot, I would probably have to ask someone to run it but can't figure out how that would actually work practically (from the info found at bot requests).

I could cease the creation of articles and focus on cleaning the Lugnuts' articles that I haven't gotten around to but the issue of arbitrariness would still remain (as seen here Template:Adilcevaz District). Semsûrî (talk) 18:10, 27 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I really don't think being productive is a problem, especially since the articles Semsûrî created are properly sourced and about notable subjects (Populated, legally recognized places). Semsûrî obviously does not use a bot, so WP:MASSCREATION and WP:BRFA do not apply here IMO, maybe WP:MEATBOT does. I have not noticed any errors so far, and I'm not aware of a consensus against creation of this type of articles. If someone thinks creating articles about villages in Turkey is problematic, they could discuss it at WT:TURKEY, for instance. Markussep ^Talk 09:02, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

MASSCREATE also applies to semi-automated creations; by using a boilerplate Semsûrî crosses the line into semi-automation. You might be right and it is not a problem, but the only way to determine that is to go through WP:BRFA.

Semsûrî, WP:BRFA is also for requesting permission to engage in semi-automated creations, not just fully automated creation. BilledMammal (talk) 09:22, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

a doubt from technical veiw-point: Semsuri is currently auto-patrolled, a bot is by default autopatrolled. But creations by both of them would be similar in regards to NPP/R queue. The only difference here would be semi/automated creation vs manual creation. I'm pretty sure that I am missing something here. —usernamekiran (talk) 18:37, 28 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Southern Kurdish

Hello Semsûrî, As for undoing my edits on Southern Kurdish article like this and this, look at Sorani and look for "(کوردیی ناوەندی – Kurdîy Nawendî)" in List of Indo-European languages. This is the same thing for کوردیی باشووری. Anyway, I wanna say that I don’t have much time on something like that. If you don’t like to believe, then don’t. With my respect. ⇒ Aram Talk 14:23, 8 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The reference used in the article, Ethnologue writes "کوردی باشووری" which is also used a lot also on South Kurdish wikipedia[1]. We should stick with this one and not what I assume is Sorani you are changing to. Semsûrî (talk) 14:26, 8 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think @Paraw: can correct us as he is the main user of Southern Kurdish Wikipedia. ⇒ Aram Talk 14:44, 8 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Aram:,@Semsûrî:Hello dear friends; As mentioned in Southern Kurdish Wikipedia's Article, both "کوردی باشووری" and "کوردی خوارین" are correct. If you ask me, I prefer the first, because the later doesn't exactly mean "South" and actually means "lower" (in contrast to "Upper"- Serû and Xwarû/Jêrû in Sorani). It is necessary to pay attention to this point that this typology of Kurdish languages has established by linguists in recent decades and not only these two terms, but also "Nawendî" ("Middle") and "Bakûrî" ("Northern") Kurdish are academic terms of linguistics and is rarely used by native speakers. The words "Başûr" and "Bakûr" were not common in the southern Kurdish language itself until two decades ago, but in the last two decades, especially after the publication of the Ferheng-i Başûr of Ako Celîliyan and also due to the increasing connection between the struggles of our nation in four divided parts of our motherland in the last two decades, they have became common words even in Southern Kurdish. If you want to know my opinion, I think it's better to write "کوردی باشووری (خوارین)". Thanks and respect.--Paraw (talk) 23:58, 8 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Paraw Thank you for your detailed reply, but I wanna say the purpose of the conversation was between "کوردیی باشووری" and "کوردی باشووری" for Southern Kurdish article. Which one is correct and why? ⇒ Aram Talk 14:43, 10 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Aram:,@Semsûrî:Oh, so I didn't understand correctly! The later (کوردی باشووری) is correst, because the preposition equivalent to "from" and also for adjectives and adverbs in Sorani Kurdish language is "î / ی"; but in Southern Kurdish that is "i / - ". That is to say, the first one is stretched and the later is short. For example: "Maĺ-î Ême / ماڵی ئێمە" in Soranî, "Maĺ-i Ême / ماڵ ئێمە" in Keĺhuřî/Southern Kurdish. This issue must be respected everywhere.Paraw (talk) 00:32, 11 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Semsûrî and @Paraw Aha, thank you very much for your explanation. I thought that my edit, which was discovered in recent years, was the same for Southern Kurdish, but you know both Central Kurdish and Southern Kurdish better than I and know which style/format is correct. However, here, It looks like the Central Kurdish rule is not compatible for Southern Kurdish. Thanks and sorry for my edits. ⇒ Aram Talk 20:45, 12 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Kılıçlı in Benninghaus

What does "Al Tur" refer to then for Kılıçlı, whereas all the other villages and tribes are referred to as "Al Kur"? Aintabli (talk) 15:26, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

In the Benninghaus reference? The tribe is under "Kurds: Alevi" on page 137. There's no "Al Tur" as far as I see. Semsûrî (talk) 15:28, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

See [2], [3]. Aintabli (talk) 15:32, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oh I see that now but the "Tur" is not ethnicity but language (it says so on page 127). Semsûrî (talk) 15:39, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Okay then, sorry for the confusion. The repetition of Alevi or "Al" causes it to appear as if it's referring to something other than language. In either case, I would mention language as well. If it's too long, in a separate section for demographics, or maybe a new article could be started for the tribe. Aintabli (talk) 15:52, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have any literature on Kılıçlı (other than where they live) so I won't be the one creating such page. You can just add language and religion to the village pages. Semsûrî (talk) 15:55, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

Sorry for bothering you a second time. This is not relevant to my earlier question, but I don't want to bloat your talkpage with new sections each time. I was checking Kurds in Turkey#Middle Ages, especially the part about the Modanlı tribe, and something caught my attention. (I think you first added that bit.) 1184 is a year when everything was quite blurry. There was barely a well-established Muslim presence in the region with constant wars with the Byzantines. I am not an expert on this, but I don't know of any records that have detailed accounts on the demographics of the region with details on tribes. The Ottomans had that. 1184 appears like a year from the Islamic calendar, which would actually make it 1770, pretty close to the time of forced migrations of Kurds to the region. Alakom puts doubt on that date as well. This appears to be verging on WP:FRINGE. I'm not sure if he's citing this guy, but a regional historian, Halil İbrahim Uçak, appears to be the earliest source to suggest this (in 1986). It is very possible that there was a confusion on the year, and I wouldn't consider him an established scholar. Though, I don't want to be so sure, given once my doubts turned out wrong. I look forward to hearing your opinion on whether we should include it. It's best if there's another independent reference on this. Aintabli (talk) 01:50, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe you're right about the confusion surrounding the dates. You can just remove it then. Semsûrî (talk) 09:37, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I also believe that there should be a separate article for the Kurds of Central Anatolia. I have started a discussion at Talk:Kurds in Turkey#Separate article for Kurds of (Central) Anatolia for your information. Aintabli (talk) 15:02, 11 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Question

Hi Semsûrî, if you have any references about Kurdish villages and their names in Kurdish (especially in Turkey) please share them with me if you have time. my regards Sulaimanl (talk) 01:36, 5 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There isn't one reference that encompasses all of the names. Usually the reference in use on the article is the one that has the Kurdish name. Are there specific ones that you are looking for? Semsûrî (talk) 07:43, 5 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No there are no specific ones I was just wondering if there are references about the Kurdish villages in Turkey as there are Arabic sources on the names of Kurdish villages in Syria that includes their meanings, the history of naming etc. By example Ovacık, Samsat in Kurdish Wikipedia is named Tozik but it lacks sources. Sulaimanl (talk) 16:15, 8 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

In this case, Öncü does state that the Kurdish name of the village is Tûzik on page 344 in Ferhenga Devoka Herêma Semsûrê. Semsûrî (talk) 16:44, 8 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

When it comes the etymology I can't think of any references, sorry. Semsûrî (talk) 16:57, 8 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Alright thank you for answering Sulaimanl (talk) 11:45, 9 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Update request

Hello.

Can you remove the United Kingdom from File:European Union North Korea Locator.svg, since it is no longer a member of the EU?

Yours sincerely, Multituberculata (talk) 10:16, 2 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello.

Can you correct this map, since you are knowledgeable about SVG files? The original uploader, has not been active since February 2023.

Yours sincerely, Multituberculata (talk) 09:28, 4 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I tried but it doesn't seem to be possible to separate the UK from the rest of the EU on the map. Semsûrî (talk) 09:52, 4 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I understand. Never mind. Thank you for the reply. Multituberculata (talk) 16:10, 4 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I did figure it out and it should be updated now. Semsûrî (talk) 16:46, 4 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for the update! Multituberculata (talk) 07:43, 5 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Languages of Turkey

I know there's a problem with the other editor but am not sure what's going on. Doug Weller talk 07:39, 21 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The ethnologue reference for the added graph does not contain those percentages, nor does the site give absolute numbers with the total population of the country (which would have allowed for the use of the pct template.) The edit is therefore OR. On other pages, they've added numbers and given the Iranian census as a reference, but the Iranian state does not enumerate their population by ethnicity or first language. Semsûrî (talk) 09:29, 21 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

And this version?[4] I'm trying to decide if I need to take action. Doug Weller talk 16:26, 21 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The editor is misconstruing the numbers given by Ethnologue. The table below that bar called Main language families in Turkey according to Ethnologue, 2009 gives us both L1 and L2 speakers of certain language groups, so this is not first language numbers which the editor's bar template makes it seem like. It is simply misleading. Semsûrî (talk) 16:57, 21 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Doug Weller talk 18:22, 21 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Question

Hi again Semsûrî, do you know anything about MENDELKANİ tribe around Mardin? And are they kurds? Sulaimanl (talk) 14:57, 13 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Also RESHAN, MAHMEDI, KESHKOLI, SIROKHLI, MUSIKAN, PENJINAN, RESHKOTANLI, BISHERI, KALENDELAN, TATAWAT, NAKIBAN, DEKSHURI, DERAVERAN. And “GARISAN and MISHAR” if they are tribe. Maybe the names are written incorrectly because they are from an old British document. Sulaimanl (talk) 15:16, 13 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I can recognize some of them but the Mardin section at Kurdish tribes is exhausted. Older documents may be outdated and should generally not be used. Semsûrî (talk) 15:20, 13 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Sulaimanl (talk) 20:00, 13 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Language codes in templates

Heya, Semsûrî. I saw your your edit at Foreign relations of Kiribati. I'd like to remind you that the language code se is not for Swedish, but for Northern Sámi, an unrelated language; the code for Swedish is sv. Please be more careful when adding language codes in the future, thanks. ArcticSeeress (talk) 12:38, 16 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Kurdish settlements in Turkey

Hi, I don't understand why you reverted my edit. I agree that the name "Ethnic enclaves" isn't great, we could rename it, but we need a common category for ethnic communities in Turkey, former and present. Currently Kurds are the only main ones not in Category:Ethnic enclaves in Turkey. a455bcd9 (Antoine) (talk) 08:49, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I simply removed it because Kurds don't live in an enclave in Turkey. I agree that the category should be renamed maybe to "ethnic communities in Turkey" otherwise its just not accurate to have the Kurdish category included. Semsûrî (talk) 08:53, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I agree but it seems to be the standard term on all Wikipedia: Category:Ethnic enclaves by country. So can we still rename the category? (I'm fine with this but I also like consistency...)

By the way: is "settlements" good for Kurds? Isn't "communities" better? For instance pages like Kurds in Istanbul, Tarlabaşı, and Esenyurt don't refer to "settlements" but to places with significant Kurdish "communities" and should be categorized as such. a455bcd9 (Antoine) (talk) 09:00, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If I'm not mistaken, the 'settlement'-category excludes areas where Kurds are a minority such as Istanbul or Ankara. If you want a category that includes all places that have a Kurdish presence, its frankly almost going to be a category for most cities in the country. In regard to changing the Kurdish category, there is a consistency here (Category:Kurdish settlements). For now, I'm okay with readding the Kurdish settlements category to the ethnic enclaves one but it just may give a wrong impression to readers. Semsûrî (talk) 09:10, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I was talking more about specific neighborhoods in Turkish cities rather than whole cities (which all have significant Kurdish populations indeed). Anyway I don't have a definite opinion on the subject, I was working mostly on adding data about non-Muslims populations before 1915 and official language data according to the 1927 to articles of Turkish cities when I noticed the absence of Kurds in the category. I'll continue my work and I may come back to this point later :) Have a good day. a455bcd9 (Antoine) (talk) 09:14, 17 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Central neighbourhoods

Hi, as you know I'm working on the metropolitan districts/municipalities of Turkey now. I'm looking for references for the distinction that you made in for instance Artuklu District and Midyat District between central and rural neighburhoods. The reference you used does not make that distinction (they're all in the "mahalle" list). I asked someone at Turkish wikipedia, and he said that there is no formal difference, but it was determined geographically, which seems a bit arbitrary to me. In the population statistics database we can find out which were the quarters of the pre-2013 municipalities (e.g. Mardin had 23 of them, but not Yalım which was a separate municipality, and not Hamzabey, which seems pretty far from the city centre). Do you know of other sources we could use to distinguish between central and rural? Otherwise, I suppose we'd better merge the lists or use the pre-2013 quarters for central neighbourhoods. Markussep ^Talk 07:44, 30 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Municipal authorities do in many cases differentiate between the two groups by using the term kırsal for the rural ones. Like in this report from Muğla muncipality.[5] I either found such a reference for Artuklu and Midyat, or simply used the pre-2013 quarters for central neighborhoods - not sure. Semsûrî (talk) 08:32, 30 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

OK, clear, I haven't found anything similar for Mardin, so I think I'll add a note with reference to TÜIK then for the pre-2013 quarters/neighbourhoods. Markussep ^Talk 11:48, 2 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Results updates

Hello. When making updates like this, please make sure you also update the invalid votes and electorate, otherwise the totals/turnout percentages are wrong (both tables are now showing a turnout of over 100%). Cheers, Number 5 7 09:22, 16 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Kadıköy (Qaziköy), Kiğı

I am from that village Kadıköy (Qaziköy), my ancestors are from there. It wonders me that it is said the village would be populated by the kurds of the xiran tribe, I would love to see a source I can check, cause the village currently is populated mostly by turkish people who may have married kurdish women, but mainly in Qaziköy people speak turkish. In the past there were a lot of armenian families living in Qaziköy.

You're asking for a reliable source for my claim, but that doesn't make any sense. You said that the people were from the Xiran tribe and I asked you for a source about this because that really hurt me because I talked to my late father for a long time about our village and asked my mother about it again today. She cannot confirm your claim. She doesn't even know this tribe. My mother is over 85 years old. Therefore, I ask you to give me a link or something similar to your claim. I'm open to arguments, but unfortunately the probability of your claim is close to zero.

KigamaX (talk) 15:30, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia's articles are based on reliable references and the reference in the article mentions it as a Xiran tribe. A quick search online didn't mention any Turkish presence in the village either. Semsûrî (talk) 16:04, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

One source I can offer you is the facebook group of the village, u can find a lot of people from the village. I recommend you to ask them about their heritage and history, here is the link: https://www.facebook.com/groups/210385039142588 KigamaX (talk) 16:10, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I would be happy if you could give me some final feedback, I had already mentioned the Facebook group as a source to you. I would also be interested in your reference 3: Aşiretler raporu (in Turkish) (3rd ed.). Kaynak Yayınları. 2014. p. 71., if you had an accessible link to this, I would be equally grateful. KigamaX (talk) 16:30, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The facebook page can't be used here. You can see that Kadıköy is mentioned here[6]. Semsûrî (talk) 16:53, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your interesting link to aşiretler raporu, unfortunately you can't really download it completely and however that's only extremely short two excerpts that don't say too much in it and also doesn't actually reflect the factual situation correctly. It is correct that the people of the village have no connection to the Xiran tribe. I, as a village member, can tell you that first hand. Moreover, I have referred to the other village members on Facebook who will confirm my statements. It may be that in your referred source such a statement is made, however, in the specific case related to this village it is simply wrong researched. The villagers are the living testimony of it. Therefore I ask you to correct this wrong statement in the Wikipedia article as it is misleading and false. KigamaX (talk) 18:19, 20 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:34, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Updates in diplomatic relations

Hello mr. So I'm going to request 2 things here instead of doing it in commons for now. 1. Can you maybe check the new list in Foreign relations of Jordan? Because Akiro 2021 did not citate a number of countries. 2. In File:Diplomatic relations of Turkey.svg, Cyprus is still blue. Since I've already added a list to the wikipedia page, can you please change Cyprus' color to gray? Thank you in advance. Underdwarf58 (talk) 23:54, 24 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I've updated the Turkey map. Regarding the Jordan list, I'll wait a week or so and see if it will be like the New Zealand list where references were added little by little[7]. Semsûrî (talk) 00:06, 25 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again mr. First of all, I would like to wish you a Happy New Year. Second, maybe one tiny request to start this year off. Can you please add Palestine to File:Diplomatic relations of Eswatini.svg? There is a full date and reference in the bilateral relations section. Thank you in advance. Underdwarf58 (talk) 23:46, 31 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello and Happy New Year to you as well. I've updated the map now - thanks for letting me know. Semsûrî (talk) 00:06, 1 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello once again. I would like to request two things. Can you add Lesotho (and vise versa) and East Timor to File:Diplomatic relations of Lebanon.svg? Akiro 2021 found a source for Lesotho and Lebanon was already blue in the East Timor file. Thank you in advance. Underdwarf58 (talk) 12:52, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello mr. I don't know if it's true, but I found another page that shows countries that have maintained their ties with North Korea (before the Ukraine war at least):

https://www.northkoreaintheworld.org/diplomatic/countries-have-established-diplomatic-relations-dprk

Unlike your svg file, it did show countries like Jordan, Portugal and the UAE as while because they did cut ties with Pyongyang (Costa Rica is an error). Here is extra proof:

Jordan: https://english.alarabiya.net/News/middle-east/2018/02/01/Jordan-cuts-ties-with-North-Korea-in-line-with-the-policies-of-its-allies-

Portugal: https://www.koreaherald.com/view.php?ud=20171011000374

UAE: https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/uae-cuts-diplomatic-ties-north-korea-and-ends-visas

The reference you used to revert an edit of an anonymous user for changing the UAE on the NK list (https://www.arabnews.com/node/1176981/amp) says "diplomatic presence" which is the same as diplomatic relations so the UAE did indeed cut ties with Pyongyang. If you have the time, can you please recheck the svg files if you think that my analysis is correct? If so, Thank you in advance. Underdwarf58 (talk) 13:16, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

About Mandali

Why are you reverting the edit? The source was obviously vandalism it mentioned that:sulemani is 100% kurd while that is not true nor 52% kirkuk or 92% Erbil is Also why did you disclude iraqi turkmens when it's obviously written in many sources that turkmens live there? Kirkukturk3 (talk) 10:40, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A reference that is considered reliable triumphes your unsourced assumption. If you have sources that contradict the numbers, you should use the talkpage instead of removing the reference. Semsûrî (talk) 14:56, 4 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

the reference is inaccurate its an old propaganda writing I have read it Kirkukturk3 (talk) 12:12, 5 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Recent place-name deletions

Recently, a user, @Omnibenevolence (courtesy ping), has been removing secondary language names from Turkish cities, usually citing MOS:LEADCLUTTER or that the history section already has the name. I'm writing this here as you've been the only person to engage with this issue; but I am unsure as to how to proceed.

Firstly, I do not think that these articles have especially "cluttered" ledes, and I don't think place-names clutter ledes in general, unless they're excessive. Beyond that, however, this is not the first time I've seen these types of edits, and while I would not want to read into Omnibenevolence's intentions, I believe, at least for some people, the real problem has to do with the enforcement of this consensus (i.e. WP:NCGN's guidance that all alternative names can be listed and explained in a "Names" or "Etymology" section immediately following the lead); that alternative names either go to the lede or a section beneath.

I believe that this consensus gives too much leeway to the community, especially for articles with high amounts of "language wars", so to speak. The general sentiment across the community seems to be that putting names to the article's lede 'legitimizes' the name more than say, listing it in the next section, which is why many editors argue about names in ledes (but not in sections). Having a 'foreign' name right at the very start emphasizes the city's past/present multicultural character, while having it tucked away in a section seems to 'cleanse' the city's past/present demographics somewhat. I believe that these rules should be reorganized to give less leeway to the community, whichever way that would be. (See this discussion as well.) But again, not sure what to do about that, or what anyone else would think. Uness232 (talk) 15:29, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Uness232 Hello, thanks a lot for your opinion on this matter. My intention is to bring the articles in line with the MOS of Wikipedia, which you seem to acknowledge but want said MOS to change. I do not know how such changes are brought, feel free to advocate your view to the necessary place.

As for the belief that removing historical and foreign place names in the lead erases its history, I vehemently disagree with this notion. This is because such information is already mentioned in the other paragraphs of the lead and the sections of the article right after (generally Toponymy, Name, History, etc). Everything has its appropriate place, and per Wikipedia MOS and place name conventions which you've also outlined, foreign and historical names are discouraged from being mentioned both in the lead and history section of a place.

Again, if you would like to effect change to these Wikipedia conventions and the manual of style, feel free to do so in the relevant places. Omnibenevolence (talk) 15:50, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree, though I wouldn't want to start an argument on someone's talk page about this. I was mostly trying to get a second (and more experienced) opinion on this before taking any action, but it did not feel right to talk about an editor's behavior specifically and not notify them. Thank you for your response, and I hope you did not take this as an assumption of your intentions. My comments on intentions here come from a place of experiences with other editors in general, not you specifically. Uness232 (talk) 16:11, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that having the relevant local/historical (I don't like the term foreign here) removed from the intro and tucked away in a section can be problematic and misused by bad-faith editors. When it comes to LEADCLUTTER, I think its a question of interpretation — I, for example, think removing the transliterations here[8] would have been better than removing the four historically local names (that are not mentioned elsewhere). Edits like these are however problematic[9] and arguably disruption.

On WP:NCGN, a reorganisation that makes the guidelines more rigid is probably the way forward. Semsûrî (talk) 21:55, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Foreign definitely was not the right word; I do not know why I used it. Historical/local is much better of course.

Anyway, I'll start a talk page discussion on WP:NCGN at some point, though I'm not sure it'll go anywhere (if you would want to do that instead, you are more than welcome to; because of how busy I've been with climate-related disputes I will likely be able to start a discussion a little later). Thank you for your response. Uness232 (talk) 22:27, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed this too, and just raised the issue on User talk:Omnibenevolence#Removal of non-Turkish names. As far as the MOS is concerned, the relevent guideline is MOS:LEADLANG, which encourages the inclusion of relevent names in other languages. MOS:LEADCLUTTER does not address this specifically and I believe it's being misapplied here. I think it's noteworthy that Omnibenevolence is only removing non-Turkish names from places in Turkey, and simultaneously adding Turkish names to other articles (so apparently they're only worried about some types of 'clutter'). – Joe (talk) 15:06, 11 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Miscountings

Hello mr. It appears that the list in Foreign relations of Turkey is quite a mess, and one reason why besides the invalid references is that the number of UN member states is miscounted after your recent edits. Why is it 191? Shouldn't it be 189 considering that Armenia, Cyprus and Syria don't have formal relations with Turkey? I have rechecked the list countless times and I don't see a problem. Can you please check if either some countries being duplicated or some numbers are skipped? Thank you in advance. Underdwarf58 (talk) 10:59, 17 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 178: / Line 178: @@
 :::Hello and Happy New Year to you as well. I've updated the map now - thanks for letting me know. [[User:Semsûrî|Semsûrî]] ([[User talk:Semsûrî#top|talk]]) 00:06, 1 January 2024 (UTC)
 ::Hello once again. I would like to request two things. Can you add Lesotho (and vise versa) and East Timor to File:Diplomatic relations of Lebanon.svg? Akiro 2021 found a source for Lesotho and Lebanon was already blue in the East Timor file. Thank you in advance. [[User:Underdwarf58|Underdwarf58]] ([[User talk:Underdwarf58|talk]]) 12:52, 5 January 2024 (UTC)
+::Hello mr. I don't know if it's true, but I found another page that shows countries that have maintained their ties with North Korea (before the Ukraine war at least):
+::https://www.northkoreaintheworld.org/diplomatic/countries-have-established-diplomatic-relations-dprk
+::Unlike your svg file, it did show countries like Jordan, Portugal and the UAE as while because they did cut ties with Pyongyang (Costa Rica is an error). Here is extra proof:
+::Jordan: https://english.alarabiya.net/News/middle-east/2018/02/01/Jordan-cuts-ties-with-North-Korea-in-line-with-the-policies-of-its-allies-
+::Portugal: https://www.koreaherald.com/view.php?ud=20171011000374
+::UAE: https://www.middleeasteye.net/news/uae-cuts-diplomatic-ties-north-korea-and-ends-visas
+::The reference you used to revert an edit of an anonymous user for changing the UAE on the NK list (https://www.arabnews.com/node/1176981/amp) says "diplomatic presence" which is the same as diplomatic relations so the UAE did indeed cut ties with Pyongyang. If you have the time, can you please recheck the svg files if you think that my analysis is correct? If so, Thank you in advance. [[User:Underdwarf58|Underdwarf58]] ([[User talk:Underdwarf58|talk]]) 13:16, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
 == About Mandali  ==